If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Christopher Weeks wrote:
Bob LeChevalier wrote: But there is no "correctly" wrt to pronunciation, anyway, despite your prejudice. I don't want to look like I'm supporting his bigoted agenda, but do you really think this? Are you saying any pronunciation of a word is equally valid? Validity is in the eyes of the listener. In Texas, to drawl is correct. In Massachusetts, to drop ones "r" and use a broad "a" is correct. Selecting a word in common use in the news, "nuclear" we find to normal pronunciations "new clear" and "new que lar." I have to say, I think one of these _is_ correct and one is not. I'm sure you do. But if you go to Merriam-Webster, you find Main Entry: nu·cle·ar Pronunciation: 'nü-klE-&r, 'nyü-, ÷-ky&-l&r Function: adjective and one of the three sound files for that word is the one that you find incorrect, and is not marked as disapproved. In other words, your "incorrect" pronunciation is so common that it is considered a normal one, and hence "correct". Just remember that the tangerine-like fruit that you might eat used to be a norange (actually it was probably spelled more like nauranj, after the Arabic "naranj" hence the modern spanish naranja), and we've been mispronouncing it for centuries. If you think I'm wrong, do you think "cat" would also be an equally valid pronunciation of that word? I don't see that one in the m-w definition. And you are being silly. But if I understood the word, then it would be acceptable. When a little kid asks for "pasketti and meatballs" for dinner, we understand them. If an adult we don't know pronounces it that way, we might start to wonder. But if someone who is the parent of a small kid smiles and says that s/he is serving "pasketti and meatballs" for dinner, I smile back and understand perfectly. Communication has occurred and that is, after all, the primary purpose of language. There is a secondary purpose of language for some people, and that is to put on airs and to distinguish yourself from lesser beings. British nobility has traditionally done this for centuries, leading to Received Pronunciation (aka the Queen's English). Some people try to emulate this so as to seem like they are "upper crust" and some people explicitly disdain to do so, and not necessarily because they can't. We don't look down on a Scotsman or an Irishman for talking with their accents even though they aren't RP, but they are as "incorrect" as Black English Vernacular is in this country. lojbab -- lojbab Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group (Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.) Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Holger Dansk wrote:
I can speak incorrectly too. Anyone can. The idea is to speak correctly. Below is your post done incorrectly. [Tripe deleted] Yep. It is certainly done incorrectly. You can't even imitate black dialect close to correctly. I'll bet that they could speak your dialect a lot better than you speak theirs. lojbab -- lojbab Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group (Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.) Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
"Fletch F. Fletch" wrote:
and many do not and/or can not speak English. They do. But they don't speak your dialect. Nor do you speak the Queen's dialect, and I'm sure that there are British people who look down their nose at you for that fault. But those British people do not sit in nearly all of the seats of power in this country, so there is no consequence other than the disdain of a few Brits. We don't live in Britain, which still has an aristocracy by law. In this country, all citizens are equal, and to look down on another citizen for the way they talk is rude and crude. Racists are trying to establish a pseudo-class system in lieu of race, because technically, class discrimination isn't illegal. But looking down on any other person for any reason other than their being intentionally disruptive is simply *wrong*. The consequence of speaking only ebonics is *obvious*. It is, but should it be, assuming that you understand the person correctly? I had a lot of resentment in high school about a math teachers whose German accent I simply could not process (and in fact I have a lot of trouble with foreign accents - though I've never had any trouble understanding a black person) I'd fall off my damn chair if I ever heard a Supreme Court Justice or a Cabinet Secretary, etc. speaking ebonics and so would you I presume. I might out of surprise, but I hope not. I have no doubt that Clarence Thomas and Colin Powell are capable of doing so, and perhaps they actually do so when they let their hair down. So what? lojbab -- lojbab Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group (Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.) Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Holger Dansk wrote:
I don't think ebonics is taught anywhere in the United States. Even black people decided it was a bunch of doo doo. I don't think you know what ebonics is. lojbab -- lojbab Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group (Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.) Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Holger Dansk wrote:
Here is what Cosby said: Note my highlights Cosby, Saying the Darndest Things ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ • Bill Cosby was anything but politically correct in his remarks Monday night at a Constitution Hall bash commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Brown v. Board of Education decision. To astonishment, laughter and ^^^^^^^^ applause, Cosby mocked everything from urban fashion to black spending ^^^^^^ and speaking habits. Most of quote omitted but then: . . . .... . . . .... . . . .... . . . Most of the quote was omitted by the reporter, who included only the juicy parts and lots of ellipses. You can't be a doctor with that kind of crap coming out of your mouth!" You also can't be a doctor with the word "crap" coming out of your mouth. But you can be a Doctor of Education and a comedian. The link works fine for me. It's: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004May18.html The Post requires you to register to read articles. The poster was complaining about registering. lojbab -- lojbab Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group (Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.) Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 22 May 2004 10:51:37 -0400, Bob LeChevalier
wrote: "Fletch F. Fletch" wrote: Bob LeChevalier wrote: wrote: Those comments you question at the beginning of the post, are *Cosby's* not mine. He has donated millions to support DAFNz in college. He has a much better grasp of DAFNhood than you do, Bob. Cosby is a comedian. Unless I had the full text of his comments with all the context, and indeed preferably a video, since delivery is part of his humor, I would not interpret his comments any differently than I did. As posted, they were baloney, and because you posted them (regardless of who said them originally), they were racist baloney. Everything you say is racist baloney (even if you were to agree with me this would be the case), because you are a subhuman racist. With all due respect, Cosby has a PhD in education. And if you have ever listened to him talk, you would know that he is a very smart, thoughtful person. You do a disservice to him by dismissing him as a comedian. I'm sure he is very smart, and can make intelligent comments about education. But the reporting of the gala seems to make it clear that while his comments had bite, the entertainers who were present were performing their trade, and one cannot judge a comment without context as well as sound and video information that would convey whether his remark was serious, or comedically timed. In particular, the snippets that were quoted sound like the sort of thing that he says in his comedy routines, taking real life situations and phrasing them in exaggerated but not wholly inaccurate manner. He had a routine about special education on one of his earliest albums in the 60s which was just that sort of thing that would sound politically incorrect and offensive if spoken at an education conference, but was quite funny on a comedy album. This gala was somewhere in between, probably with elements of both. Denial, denial, denial. All you have to do is go to the Google search engine (www.Google.com) and type in Cosby and "why you ain't" without the quotation marks and you will fine numerous web sites with the event on them. He was serious, of course. Man, everyone knows that many black people speak this way. Where you been, on another planet? It's just common knowledge. lojbab Holger http://www.mindspring.com/~holger1/holger1.htm |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 22 May 2004 15:28:41 GMT, Christopher Weeks
wrote: Holger Dansk wrote: You probably don't realize that there is a correct way to do everything. I sure don't. I'm confused about the "correct" way to sit, for instance. I sort of figure that if your butt is on a chair, bench, couch, the ground, the back of a car, the edge of a table, etc. and your weight is mainly supported by that butt, allowing your legs and feet to rest, then you're sitting correctly. Right? What does it even mean to sit incorrectly? Slouching is very incorrect. It means to walk, stand, or sit with a slouch. A slouch is a loose or drooping gait or posture. It's usually indicative of a lazy or incompetent person, who, by the way, may be called a slouch. What makes it incorrect? What makes the lack of a slouch superior? The same thing that makes walking with a drooping gait not the proper way to walk unless you are trying to look like a clown. You stand up straight when you walk. Chris Holger http://www.mindspring.com/~holger1/holger1.htm |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 22 May 2004 15:35:06 GMT, Christopher Weeks
wrote: Fletch F. Fletch wrote: You probably don't realize that there is a correct way to do everything. I sure don't. I'm confused about the "correct" way to sit, for instance. I sort of figure that if your butt is on a chair, bench, couch, the ground, the back of a car, the edge of a table, etc. and your weight is mainly supported by that butt, allowing your legs and feet to rest, then you're sitting correctly. Right? What does it even mean to sit incorrectly? It means to sit in a way that leads to injury, short term or long term, through falling or improper body posture. It means to sit in a way such that you damage things. There is also a correct way to look at a monitor and type while you are sitting correctly. Set that up wrong and work at a computer for a few years. You'll find what incorrect means. OK, but what's it to you? Everyone does stuff with, for and to their bodies that could be called sub-optimal. And really, the best way to look at these factors is through risk assessment. There is a risk that poor posture will lead to late-life back trauma. There is a risk that poor wrist positioning will lead to nervous disorders after years of typing. So those are incorrect, right? What about driving? Is driving incorrect because there is a risk of injury and death? I mean, the implications here are pretty broad and it certainly sounds to many of us like a very broad brush painting along lines of truth are being used to obscure racism. What's your agenda? That's what Cosby is trying to tell you. Quit hiding behind racism, and begin valuing what is right and what is wrong. Try to be someone who does the right thing. Care about yourself and other people, and care about how you behave or act. It's very, very, very, very important to do that. Stop this "I don't give a damn." attitude. Holger Chris http://www.mindspring.com/~holger1/holger1.htm |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 22 May 2004, Bob LeChevalier wrote: "Fletch F. Fletch" wrote: Bob LeChevalier wrote: wrote: Those comments you question at the beginning of the post, are *Cosby's* not mine. He has donated millions to support DAFNz in college. He has a much better grasp of DAFNhood than you do, Bob. Cosby is a comedian. Unless I had the full text of his comments with all the context, and indeed preferably a video, since delivery is part of his humor, I would not interpret his comments any differently than I did. As posted, they were baloney, and because you posted them (regardless of who said them originally), they were racist baloney. Everything you say is racist baloney (even if you were to agree with me this would be the case), because you are a subhuman racist. With all due respect, Cosby has a PhD in education. And if you have ever listened to him talk, you would know that he is a very smart, thoughtful person. You do a disservice to him by dismissing him as a comedian. I'm sure he is very smart, and can make intelligent comments about education. But the reporting of the gala seems to make it clear that while his comments had bite, the entertainers who were present were performing their trade, and one cannot judge a comment without context as well as sound and video information that would convey whether his remark was serious, or comedically timed. In particular, the snippets that were quoted sound like the sort of thing that he says in his comedy routines, taking real life situations and phrasing them in exaggerated but not wholly inaccurate manner. He had a routine about special education on one of his earliest albums in the 60s which was just that sort of thing that would sound politically incorrect and offensive if spoken at an education conference, but was quite funny on a comedy album. This gala was somewhere in between, probably with elements of both. Bob, I don't think Cosby would make these remarks *just* to be funny. I believe he was mostly serious tho perhaps a bit exaggerated. And I don't think he was being funny at all when he beseeched blacks to stand up as they did during the civil rights movement and take their neighborhoods back. His opinion, while debatable, is not unique among successful blacks. They see the problems as disproportionate and they believe the solutions are within. The conversation often centers on why things are the way they are and, perhaps, addressing the symptoms. We hear from the racist crowd here that blacks are pre-destined for failure as a result of genetics and IQ. Others rightfully speak out against such nonsense. Meanwhile, Cosby and others are saying enough with the accusations and excuses already; just get out there and make something of yourself. Ultimately, you are the master of your own reality. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
A first 'Parker Jensen' bill advances | wexwimpy | Foster Parents | 0 | February 8th 04 06:29 PM |